Hello everybody, Excuse me for probably being impatient. But may I have some feedback on my proposal?
On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Alexander Zubkov <zubkov...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think this version will be better. It uses metric mask (like for > some other options) instead of simple yes/no flag. > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 2:44 AM, Alexander Zubkov <zubkov...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hello again, >> >> Things turned out to be not so hard. Please take a look at the attached >> patch. >> I'm only not sure if RTA_PRIORITY is enough. Because the print_route >> function prints "metric" also for some situations with RTA_METRICS, >> which I haven't managed to understand. >> >> On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Alexander Zubkov <zubkov...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> Hello all, >>> >>> Currently routes in the Linux routing table have these "key" fields: >>> prefix, tos, table, metric (as I know). I.e. we cannot have two >>> different routes with the same set of this fields. And "ip route list" >>> command can be provided with all but one of those fields. We cannot >>> pass metric to it and this is inconvenient. I ask if this behaviour >>> can be changed by someone. We can even use "secondary" fields, for >>> example type, dev or via, but not metric unfortunately. >>> Sorry, I can not provide patches. I have written code long time ago. I >>> tried to trace it, but as I see it parses arguments and fills some >>> structures. And then my tries to understand failed. >>> I opened the bug: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=197897, >>> but I was pointed out that this mailing list is a better place for >>> this question. >>> >>> -- >>> Alexander Zubkov
